Sunday, July 19, 2015

"But what to do? I have other dreams as well--apocalyptic ones. I think:

Israel has been building nuclear weapons for 30 years. The Jews understand what passive and powerless acceptance of doom has meant for them in the past, and they have ensured against it. Masada was not an example to follow--it hurt the Romans not a whit, but Sampson in Gaza? With an H-bomb? What would serve the Jew-hating world better in repayment for thousands of years of massacres but a Nuclear Winter. Or invite all those tut-tutting European statesmen and peace activists to join us in the ovens?

For the first time in history, a people facing extermination while the world either cackles or looks away--unlike the Armenians, Tibetans, World War II European Jews or Rwandans--have the power to destroy the world. The ultimate justice?

These are my dark thoughts and quiet desperations. Who will dissolve them? Who will silence the madness? Will I even be allowed to become an old, bitter man? Will any of us have the chance to look back on these days beyond the mushroom clouds of tomorrow?"

"The nuclear deal strengthens the military option in a number of
different ways. One of the least understood is Iran’s decision to
relinquish the plutonium route to the bomb. In one of the only permanent
features of the deal, Iran has agreed to redesign its Arak heavy water
reactor so that it is incapable of producing weapons-grade plutonium,
and promised to ship all the spent fuel from the reactor abroad.
Furthermore, Tehran has pledged to never acquire reprocessing
facilities, which are necessary to produce fissile material for a
nuclear weapon.
This is crucial. Although the heavy water reactor is not the most
technically difficult nuclear facility to destroy, it is easily the most
politically challenging. Indeed, if the Arak heavy water reactor went
critical, it would have been impossible to bomb the facility without
releasing large amounts of radioactive material into the atmosphere. As
Amos Yadlin, the former head of Israel’s military intelligence, has warned: “Whoever considers attacking an active reactor is willing to invite another Chernobyl, and no one wants to do that.”
The intrusive inspections of the nuclear deal will also strengthen
the military option by allowing the United States and its allies to
better map out Iran’s nuclear program. Although the broad contours of
Iran’s nuclear facilities are well known, their exact dimensions, as
well as the entire supply chain, almost certainly eludes the United
States and its allies. As a major 2012 report
by the bipartisan Iran Group noted, “complete destruction of Iran’s
nuclear program is unlikely” even if U.S. airstrikes are carried out to
“near perfection.” Similarly, Greg Thielmann, a former State Department
intelligence official, recently pointed out
that, after a U.S. attack, it’s hard to imagine “there would not be
hundreds of centrifuges left intact.” Intrusive inspections will give
the United States and its allies better intelligence to successfully
eliminate Iran’s nuclear program.
Most importantly, the new nuclear deal will give the United States
and Israel time to develop the capabilities they need to carry out a
military strike. A frequent criticism of the deal is that Iran will have
few, if any, restrictions on its nuclear program after the deal expires
in ten to fifteen years. This ignores that the United States and Israel
will be similarly unrestricted after the deal’s expiration.
Moreover, while Iran’s nuclear program will be frozen in place for
over a decade, the United States and Israel will be free to strengthen
their military capabilities. This will be especially important for
Israel, which currently lacks the requisite aircraft and payloads to
successfully destroy Iran’s Fordow enrichment plant, which is buried
deep within a mountain.
The United States is more capable of bombing the enrichment
plant. Over the past decade, it has developed the 30,000-pound massive
ordnance penetrator (MOP) for the exact purpose of destroying
underground facilities like the Fordow enrichment plant.
Still, it’s unclear if the MOP can successfully destroy all Iran’s
nuclear facilities. The bomb can reportedly burrow through 200 feet of
earth before exploding, but the Fordow plant is buried 250 feet below a
mountain and likely reinforced with concrete. As late as 2012, the U.S.
military conceded the bunker-buster MOP couldn’t destroy the Fordow plant.The Pentagon’s current war plans reportedly
call for dropping two bunker-buster bombs on top of each other in order
to reach the enrichment plant. This requires excellent precision and,
despite recent upgrades to the bomb’s internal guidance system, would be
extraordinarily difficult to achieve in the fog of war. However, given
all the progress the United States has made in building more powerful
bunker-busters over the past decade, there is every reason to believe
that Washington will have a bomb capable of destroying the Fordow plant
in ten year’s time."

"Joffe’s provocative screed seems to mimic a little-known 2009 strategy paper
produced by the Brookings Institution (a US-based neocon, pro-Israel
think tank) entitled “Which Path to Persia?” That paper, co-authored by
former high-level American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)
member Martin Indyk, likewise outlined duplicitous strategies for
out-and-out regime change in Iran including cyber warfare, terrorism,
inciting internal ethnic and religious strife, provoking rebellion among
minority groups, a military coup, and overt military invasion. The
Brookings neocons weighed the pros and cons of each “option” and even
went so far as to call for “goading” Iran into retaliating to US covert
operations as a pretext for war."

"At the same time, religion scholar Tomer Persico says Jewish law presents a seeming Catch-22: The red heifer must be ritually slaughtered by a cohen who is ritually pure himself – and due to the lack of red heifer ashes, such a cohen does not exist.

But Temple Institute activists say this problem can be circumvented to create the necessary ashes."

"But what to do? I have other dreams as well--apocalyptic ones. I think:

Israel has been building nuclear weapons for 30 years. The Jews understand what passive and powerless acceptance of doom has meant for them in the past, and they have ensured against it. Masada was not an example to follow--it hurt the Romans not a whit, but Sampson in Gaza? With an H-bomb? What would serve the Jew-hating world better in repayment for thousands of years of massacres but a Nuclear Winter. Or invite all those tut-tutting European statesmen and peace activists to join us in the ovens?

For the first time in history, a people facing extermination while the world either cackles or looks away--unlike the Armenians, Tibetans, World War II European Jews or Rwandans--have the power to destroy the world. The ultimate justice?

These are my dark thoughts and quiet desperations. Who will dissolve them? Who will silence the madness? Will I even be allowed to become an old, bitter man? Will any of us have the chance to look back on these days beyond the mushroom clouds of tomorrow?"

"The nuclear deal strengthens the military option in a number of
different ways. One of the least understood is Iran’s decision to
relinquish the plutonium route to the bomb. In one of the only permanent
features of the deal, Iran has agreed to redesign its Arak heavy water
reactor so that it is incapable of producing weapons-grade plutonium,
and promised to ship all the spent fuel from the reactor abroad.
Furthermore, Tehran has pledged to never acquire reprocessing
facilities, which are necessary to produce fissile material for a
nuclear weapon.
This is crucial. Although the heavy water reactor is not the most
technically difficult nuclear facility to destroy, it is easily the most
politically challenging. Indeed, if the Arak heavy water reactor went
critical, it would have been impossible to bomb the facility without
releasing large amounts of radioactive material into the atmosphere. As
Amos Yadlin, the former head of Israel’s military intelligence, has warned: “Whoever considers attacking an active reactor is willing to invite another Chernobyl, and no one wants to do that.”
The intrusive inspections of the nuclear deal will also strengthen
the military option by allowing the United States and its allies to
better map out Iran’s nuclear program. Although the broad contours of
Iran’s nuclear facilities are well known, their exact dimensions, as
well as the entire supply chain, almost certainly eludes the United
States and its allies. As a major 2012 report
by the bipartisan Iran Group noted, “complete destruction of Iran’s
nuclear program is unlikely” even if U.S. airstrikes are carried out to
“near perfection.” Similarly, Greg Thielmann, a former State Department
intelligence official, recently pointed out
that, after a U.S. attack, it’s hard to imagine “there would not be
hundreds of centrifuges left intact.” Intrusive inspections will give
the United States and its allies better intelligence to successfully
eliminate Iran’s nuclear program.
Most importantly, the new nuclear deal will give the United States
and Israel time to develop the capabilities they need to carry out a
military strike. A frequent criticism of the deal is that Iran will have
few, if any, restrictions on its nuclear program after the deal expires
in ten to fifteen years. This ignores that the United States and Israel
will be similarly unrestricted after the deal’s expiration.
Moreover, while Iran’s nuclear program will be frozen in place for
over a decade, the United States and Israel will be free to strengthen
their military capabilities. This will be especially important for
Israel, which currently lacks the requisite aircraft and payloads to
successfully destroy Iran’s Fordow enrichment plant, which is buried
deep within a mountain.
The United States is more capable of bombing the enrichment
plant. Over the past decade, it has developed the 30,000-pound massive
ordnance penetrator (MOP) for the exact purpose of destroying
underground facilities like the Fordow enrichment plant.
Still, it’s unclear if the MOP can successfully destroy all Iran’s
nuclear facilities. The bomb can reportedly burrow through 200 feet of
earth before exploding, but the Fordow plant is buried 250 feet below a
mountain and likely reinforced with concrete. As late as 2012, the U.S.
military conceded the bunker-buster MOP couldn’t destroy the Fordow plant.The Pentagon’s current war plans reportedly
call for dropping two bunker-buster bombs on top of each other in order
to reach the enrichment plant. This requires excellent precision and,
despite recent upgrades to the bomb’s internal guidance system, would be
extraordinarily difficult to achieve in the fog of war. However, given
all the progress the United States has made in building more powerful
bunker-busters over the past decade, there is every reason to believe
that Washington will have a bomb capable of destroying the Fordow plant
in ten year’s time."

"Joffe’s provocative screed seems to mimic a little-known 2009 strategy paper
produced by the Brookings Institution (a US-based neocon, pro-Israel
think tank) entitled “Which Path to Persia?” That paper, co-authored by
former high-level American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)
member Martin Indyk, likewise outlined duplicitous strategies for
out-and-out regime change in Iran including cyber warfare, terrorism,
inciting internal ethnic and religious strife, provoking rebellion among
minority groups, a military coup, and overt military invasion. The
Brookings neocons weighed the pros and cons of each “option” and even
went so far as to call for “goading” Iran into retaliating to US covert
operations as a pretext for war."

"At the same time, religion scholar Tomer Persico says Jewish law presents a seeming Catch-22: The red heifer must be ritually slaughtered by a cohen who is ritually pure himself – and due to the lack of red heifer ashes, such a cohen does not exist.

But Temple Institute activists say this problem can be circumvented to create the necessary ashes."